1. By this appeal, arises out of the judgment dated 07/10/1999 passed in Sessions Case No.27 of 1998 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Gandhinagar whereby the respondents - accused were acquitted of the charges for the offences punishable under S.304(B), S.306, S.498(A) read with S.34 and S.114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'the IPC').

2. It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased by name Anjuben (herein after referred to as 'the deceased') is the legally wedded wife of A - 1. Their marriage was solemnized on 23/02/1996. A - 2 is the brother - in - law, A - 3 is the father - in - law, A - 4 is the mother - in law and A - 5 is the sister - in - law of the deceased. The deceased resided in joint family in Sector - 22 at Gandhinagar. It is stated that after the marriage, all the accused have subjected her to cruelty by harassing her and demanded the dowry. It is further stated that the deceased informed to her parents and uncle about the demand of dowry and harassment.
2.1. It is further stated that on 08/01/1998, at about 9:45 a.m., the deceased talked with her father about the harassment. Thereafter, the deceased committed the suicide in the house of the accused.

3. After registration of the complaint by the complainant Kamleshbhai Parmar, the father of the deceased, investigation was carried out and on completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed before the concerned magistrate court. As the case was exclusively triable by the learned sessions division, the same was made over to the Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Gandhinagar.

4. In the trial court, the charges for the aforesaid offences were framed against the accused. The accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried.

5. The prosecution has examined the witnesses and produced the ocular evidence and also filed the documentary evidence to prove the charges against the accused.

6. After completion of the prosecution evidence, further statements of the accused under S.313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded with regard to incriminating circumstances made in the evidences rendered by the prosecution and they have denied it.

7. The defense side also examined the defense witnesses and produced the documentary evidences in form of photographs of happy marriage life of the deceased with the accused.

8. At the end of the trial, after considering the evidence on record, the trial court found the accused not guilty and acquitted them of the said charges.

9. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment of acquittal, the State has preferred the present appeal challenging the legality and validity of the impugned judgment of acquittal.

10. When the appeal come up for hearing, we have heard learned APP Mr. Niraj Sharma for the appellant - State and learned advocate Mr. Vishal k. Aanandjiwala for the respondents - accused on the facts as well as provisions of law.

11. Learned APP submitted at length the facts of the charges levelled against the accused, the marriage span of the deceased and referred the ocular and documentary evidences produced by the prosecution.

12. Learned APP vehemently argued that the deceased committed the suicide within a period of seven years and the learned trial court have to consider the provisions of S.113(B) of the Indian Evidence Act. The learned APP further referred to the ocular evidence of father, mother and uncle of the deceased and vehemently argued that the prosecution has able to prove the facts of the cruelty and further referred the ocular evidence of all three witnesses and submitted that the prosecution has able to prove the demand of dowry.

13. Learned APP submitted at length the fact of medical evidence and vehemently argued that the deceased committed the suicide and it is an unnatural death of the deceased and further submitted the fact of FSL analysis report of saree and vehemently argued that the deceased hanged on fan with saree. It is further